CBS News Report on U.S. Military's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy

[Patroklos]

Race = a social construct with no biological behavioral/psychological requirements or status other than what we give it.

So Asher, what behavior things does a black man have to do because of biology of his skin pigment? Drink 40oz? Shoot up neighborhoods? Smoke crack?

I am tempted to continue bashing you here, but since you started a thread about it where you deliberately hacked the statement, you can't even claim you read the statement wrong.

Didn't think that one through did you?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Patroklos
So Asher, what behavior things does a black man have to do because of biology of his skin pigment? Drink 40oz? Shoot up neighborhoods? Smoke crack?

I am tempted to continue bashing you here, but since you started a thread about it where you deliberately hacked the statement, you can't even claim you read the statement wrong.

Didn't think that one through did you?

I sure did.

You're pretending there wasn't societal stress when blacks were integrated into white units a long time ago. There was.

The same **** would happen if you let gays serve with straights.

It's a very simple issue that you refuse to acknowledge. I'm just having fun with your inability to construct a real argument.

[Patroklos]

You're pretending there wasn't societal stress when blacks were integrated into white units a long time ago. There was.

Is that what I am pretending? Is that why I said this...

"And those people were right. The difference is that race is a figment of people's imagination. The sexuality of men and women no matter who they are attracted to, is not."

In response to to this....

"People were upset that integrating the black soldiers with the white soldiers would cause "organizational stress" and would cause stress and pressures etcetc that would be detrimental to the unit."

The funny thing is, in the above YOU are argueing that integrating blacks would did NOT create organizational stress. In the space of a page you have completely contridicted yourself. Not only that, you falsly accused ME of holding YOUR original position. Priceless

The same **** would happen if you let gays serve with straights.

Actually, you have incoherently argued, this entire thread that not only will the same thing not happen, but it HASN'T happened.

It's a very simple issue that you refuse to acknowledge. I'm just having fun with your inability to construct a real argument.

You should learn to recognize when people are laughing at you Asher, not with you. Most people figure this out a like 10 or 11, your day will come

[Ming]

ONLY discuss the topic... stop the personal crap... or both of you will be restricted.

[Patroklos]

ONLY discuss the topic... stop the personal crap... or both of you will be restricted.

Noted

I compared the integration of black/white military units in terms of societal/organizational stresses to that of integrating gay/straight military units in terms of societal/organizational stress. Then you dropped this bombshell.

The only similarity between integrating race and gender/sexual orientation is the fact that you are integrating something.

The difference is, the concerns over integrating blacks such as immaturity, disloyalty, propensity to drink/use drugs, inattention, being lazy or a thousand things white racists said to make it look like they were unfit to serve (straight biological reasons had largely been abandoned by then) proved to be false. They didn't pan out, primarily because those things were inaccurate stereotypes or because when they were valid criticisms of individuals it wasn't because that person was black.

None of that has any bearing in integrating woman or homosexuals, because the ONLY problem I have mentioned in doing so was the completely valid concern that sexual tension between members. Those desires are biologically hardwired into us, whether you are gay or straight. Perhaps budding amebas don’t have to worry about it, but human men and woman do.

So again, since I have provided ample examples of how the integration of men and women has degraded combat effectiveness (and even said it was unnecessary for it to have done so), why would gay men (or women) serving and living together not? And why should the same measures take to limit male/female sexual desires against the interest of good order and discipline not be applied to gays?

I am pretty sure you want to believe I said the very presense of gays would hurt moral, or that they just can't do the job, or that they are sexual devients that would be raping straight me in the shower, but I didn't. In fact, I specifically said the opposite. I am simply holding them to the same standard and expecting them to have the same faults that I do current serving men and women.

[Asher]

The only similarity between integrating race and gender/sexual orientation is the fact that you are integrating something.

They are remarkably similar situations. Period.

Just like there's rampant homophobia now in the military, racism was rampant when blacks were first integrated.

In both cases, it's the integration of one aspect of society that many soldiers are not comfortable with. It's a parallel situation.

Given the past of integration and how it worked out, and given the statements from every country who HAS implemented integration of gays, then the onus of proof lies on you to point out why having openly gay soldiers with the same infrastructure will destroy America.

[Patroklos]

They are remarkably similar situations. Period.

Only superficially, Period. But it doesn't matter.

then the onus of proof lies on you to point out why having openly gay soldiers with the same infrastructure will destroy America.

.

Why is the onus on me to prove something I never stated, let alone a position I hold?

[Asher]

I'm very confused. So you've no issues at all with openly gay soldiers serving in the US military with the same infrastructure as today. In other words, you think Don't Ask Don't Tell is a bad policy and allowing soldiers to be openly gay is fine without needing to worry about additional infrastructure.

[Patroklos]

So you've no issues at all with openly gay soldiers serving in the US military with the same infrastructure as today.

No, thats what you are saying. I am saying I have no problems with openly gay soldiers serving in the US military with the same infrustucture requriements we require for straight men and women.

In fact this integration should be easier, because as far as I know nobody has talked about lowering standards to alow more gay men/women to qualify, which is still the case with women. In fact, that is really the source of my angst with women serving, that all the problems that causes (and again, not entirely their fault, it takes two) are not covered by the percieved benefits because of the lowering of standards.

In fact there are a lot of landmines (including some of the ones I talked about) we can avoid this time around if we don't do this as some social engineering project, which is what the integration of women turned out to be.

[Dinner]

I have never heard anyone say they would lower standards to let more gays in. In fact every gay advocate always says they just want equal chances to do the job not special favors.

[Patroklos]

I have never heard anyone say they would lower standards to let more gays in. In fact every gay advocate always says they just want equal chances to do the job not special favors.

Like I said neither have I, which is why it has more potential to work better than the last mass integration.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Race and sex are not the same thing Asher. Race and sexual orientation are not the same thing Asher. This strawman was burned on the pyre of your outburst yesterday Asher.

Race relations issues are indeed different from issues concerning sex orientation groups. However, as Asher has pointed out, you can still draw legitimate historical and contemporary parallels between the racial civil rights struggle and the civil rights struggle of gays and lesbians.

BUT, I do think I understand what you're saying. You're trying to point out that the difference in this instance, is that you think there would be too much inherent sexual tension between gay men and straight men, just as it would be if women and straight men shared showers. And in THAT context, yes, this is entirely different from integrating people of different races.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Patroklos


No, thats what you are saying. I am saying I have no problems with openly gay soldiers serving in the US military with the same infrustucture requriements we require for straight men and women.

You don't have any problem repealing "don't ask don't tell?"

cool

[SlowwHand]

Are you thinking of enlisting?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Are you thinking of enlisting?

NO